The Influence of Institutional Ownership, Asset Structure, and Company Size on Debt Policy (Empirical Study on Food and Beverages Sub-Sector Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange)

Hengky Leon

doi:10.47616/jamrems.v3i1.237

Authors

Hengky Leon Widya Dharma University Pontianak, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47616/jamrems.v3i1.237

Keywords:

Intitutional Ownership, Asset Structure, Company Size, Debt Policy

Abstract

Debt policy is one part of the policy in determining funding for the company in financing every activity of operations. With the obligations within the company, it is expected to reduce the control exercised by managers on the company’s cash flow arrangements. The purpose of the research is to measure the implementation of institutional ownership, asset structure, and company size against debt policy on the food and beverages company was listed on the Indonesia stock exchange. The size that is used consists of institutional ownership percentage, comparison between fixed assets to total assets, natural logarithm of total assets and debt ratio. Analysis tools are used in the research using the SPSS program. Method of determination of samples is sensus sampling where there are 54 observation data. The analysis used in the SPSS program is descriptive analysis, normality test, multicollinearity test, heteroscedasticity test, autocorrelation test, multiple linear regression, correlation and determination test, f test, and t-test. As for the results of the research conducted is a regression model already are BLUE and have a specification of goodness fit model. Institutional ownership has no effect against debt policy, asset structure of influential positively against debt policy, and company size of influential negatively against debt policy

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Astuti, E. (2014). Pengaruh Kepemilikan Institusional, Profitabilitas, Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Kebijakan Hutang Perusahaan di Indonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Pajak, STIE AAS, 15(2), 149-159.

Campos-Alba, C. M., Prior, D., Pérez-López, G., & Zafra-Gómez, J. L. (2020). Long-term cost efficiency of alternative management forms for urban public transport from the public sector perspective. Transport Policy, 88, 16-23.

Canitez, F., Alpkokin, P., & Black, J. A. (2019). Agency costs in public transport systems: Net-cost contracting between the transport authority and private operators-impact on passengers. Cities, 86, 154-166.

Fahmi, I. (2017). Analisis Kinerja Keuangan: Bandung. Alfabeta.

Flodén, M., Kilström, M., Sigurdsson, J., & Vestman, R. (2021). Household Debt and Monetary Policy: Revealing the Cash-Flow Channel. The Economic Journal, 131(636), 1742-1771.

Gunawan, R. M. B. (2016). GRC (Good Governance, Risk Management and Compliance). Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada.

Gunderson, R., Stuart, D., & Petersen, B. (2019). The political economy of geoengineering as plan B: Technological rationality, moral hazard, and new technology. New Political Economy, 24(5), 696-715.

Harjito, A. & Martono. (2012). Manajemen Keuangan, edisi ke 2. Yogyakarta: Ekonisia.

Harmono. (2011). Manajemen Keuangan Berbasis Balance Scorecard. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.

Hery. (2017). Kajian Riset Akuntansi. Jakarta: Grasindo.

Jensen, M. C. & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(14), 305-360.

Kasmir. (2010). Pengantar Manajemen Keuangan, edisi ke 2. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group.

Purba, M. P. (2009). Asumsi Going Concern.Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu

Sujarweni, V. W. (2015). Metodologi Penelitian Bisnis dan Ekonomi. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Baru Pres.

Trisnawati, I. (2016). Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Kebijakan Hutang Pada Perusahaan Non-Keuangan Yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Bisnis dan Akuntansi, 18(1), 33-42.